Gryffn Musings

First, I beg to differ that the weather is anything other than it has always been – changeable!

Hoax, Lies, and Obfuscation.

So there are these wacky radical people who are determined to put us into the Ice Age. Yes, it only takes a couple of degrees more cooling — for we have been cooling for 11 years now — and it takes just a wee bit more to push us into an Ice Age.

I have always maintained that view and now we have some proof that this has all been contrived by folks like Al Gore, who profited greatly from all this, and other organizations. It all points to greed — money — the age-old cause of so much turmoil and pain to others.

1. Spray It Away

Some idiot wants to spray sulfur dioxide into the Earth's nearest atmospheric levels could bind with other chemicals to reflect sunlight from the Earth. Less sunlight hitting the surface means a cooler earth and another Ice Age.

This could work only too well, causing catastrophic weather changes in certain areas (such as sudden droughts). And you are using a pollutant!! What idiots.

2. Use Sunscreen

This wacky idea has a giant screen made of criss-crossing aluminum strands and putting it into space. The screen would act like a filter, preventing some infrared radiation from reaching the planet.

A 600,000 square mile screen? Launching it? Placing it into a precise position between the sun and Earth? We don't even have a working Space Shuttle replacement yet. Get real.

3. Scrub Like the Wind

This one wants a giant HEPA-like filter to take the carbon dioxide out of the air. Uh huh.

So how many filters do we need?  And where are they to be placed — like we need thousands and thousands of acres. And there is one more thing — it will take energy to separate the CO2 from the capturing chemicals and that will only produces more CO2. Doesn't make sense, does it?

4. Plant Fake Trees

Oh lord. Fake trees to absorb carbon dioxide.

They would not even look like real trees and then what do we do with captured carbon dioxide?

5. Needs More Salt

More clouds; say goodbye to the sun.

Now they want to blow salt into the air to produce them. That would increase the chances of water vapor clinging to particles (the salt) and forming clouds.

So how do we get the salt way up there?

6. Needs More Iron

Iron powder dumped into the ocean promotes the rapid growth of plankton. Plankton eats CO2, so the more the better.

Hold on there — large amounts of plankton can destroy the underwater ecosystem, killing off other species as it consumes other nutrients. So it is starving ourselves. Not smart.

7. Get Stoned

Limestone (calcium carbonate) actually contains trapped carbon dioxide. So why not turn carbon dioxide into stone? Has anyone seen Medusa?

It takes nature thousands of years to harden chemicals into stones and we would need to mine huge amounts of minerals to mix with the carbon dioxide for this mineral carbonation to work. And then heating the mixture to the high temperatures required would take even more CO2-producing energy. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

8. Bury It

Let's filter it out and then pump it underground to store it? Better still, why not pump it into places where we're trying to push oil out of the ground?

Just one thing — it is way too expensive. The gas has to be captured, compressed, and then transported to the site of injection.
Just another thing — what if it escapes years from now? Trapped in cellars, carbon dioxide could be more lethal than radon.
Yup, another way to kill us all.

source

Global Warming data thrown out — to hide the fact that the Earth is COOLING.

Scientists at the University of East Anglia have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years. And that is also because the global tempos have DROPPED over the last 11 years. They want to hide all this because the Big Business of global warming is at stake!

The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit CRU was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation. Note: this was NOT voluntary.

The admission follows the leaking of a thousand private emails sent and received by Professor Phil Jones, the CRU’s director. In them he discusses thwarting climate sceptics seeking access to such data. See, he wants to HIDE it.

In a statement on its website, the CRU said: "We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenized) data." In other words, the cooked data. The data they have already slanted to the outcome they want. Useless.

The CRU is the world’s leading center for reconstructing past climate and temperatures. Climate change sceptics have long been keen to examine exactly how its data were compiled. That is now impossible.

Shut 'em down. They are useless. They are DANGEROUS! We have idiots here trying to drop world temperatures (when they are already dropping). They could conceivably bring on another Ice Age. Oh yeah. That's real good.

Thanks to hackers who broke into the servers at a British climate research center and have now leaked years worth of e-mail messages — including one that mentions a plan to "hide the decline," [in global temps -- like, we have a global cooling!]

The data is from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (commonly called Hadley CRU), and Phil Jones, the head of the Hadley CRU, confirmed that the leaked data is real.

Same thing happened here. See Suppressed Climate Change Report

The Smoking Guns

**Manipulation of evidence:

I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.

**Private doubts about whether the world really is heating up:

The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.

**Suppression of evidence:

Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?

Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.

Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.

We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

**Fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Sceptic scientists:

Next time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beat  the crap out of him. Very tempted.

**Attempts to disguise the inconvenient truth of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP):

……Phil and I have recently submitted a paper using about a dozen NH records that fit this category, and many of which are available nearly 2K back–I think that trying to adopt a timeframe of 2K, rather than the usual 1K, addresses a good earlier point that Peck made w/ regard to the memo, that it would be nice to try to “contain” the putative “MWP”, even if we don’t yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction available that far back….

Telegraph UK

So all of us who claimed all this warming data was "cooked" — well, we are right! There is no global warming threatening the planet. Get over it already.

And then the UN wants to fight non-existant global warming with condoms.

Oh yeah, now there's a solution. But here's a motive for all this deception….

A United Nations document on "climate change" envisions a huge reordering of the world economy, likely involving trillions of dollars in wealth transfer [from US to them], millions of job losses and gains, new taxes, industrial relocations, new tariffs and subsidies, and complicated payments for greenhouse gas abatement schemes and carbon taxes — all under the supervision of the world body.

Those and other results are discussed in a UN "information note" on the fallout of the  measures that industrialized countries will be forced to take (like shelling out trillions to other countries) after it is signed by December 2009. The Obama administration has said it supports the treaty process.

U.N. 'Climate Change' Plan Would Likely Shift Trillions to Form New World Economy

John Holdren is director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy is President Obama's science advisor.

He is the one who wants ‘climate engineering’ to battle global warming.  He is quoted as saying, “It's got to be looked at.  We don't have the luxury of taking any approach off the table."

Climate engineering involves attacking carbon dioxide — that stuff we all exhale with every breath.  The stuff trees and greenery uses to make oxygen.  One dumb idea is  to purposely inject pollution into the atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays.

This from the same Climate Clown who warned us all that the planet was cooling so fast that ice would pile up so high that it would fall over and cause a tidal wave (tsunami) that would wipe out civilization.

Now, he says global warming is like being "in a car with bad brakes driving toward a cliff in the fog."  Well, at least towers of ice are no longer a threat. Whew!

A deranged alarmist. Ya think? And one who wants to put the whole planet in peril to fight his delusional problems.  Or is it that World Government to enforce Climate Debt. — and Obama is getting ready to go to Copenhagen and agree th all this crap.

He has been spouting his "ecodisasters" since the 60s. He just does not know how it will happen. Is it the cold or the heat?  Maybe an asteroid from outer space?  Martian invasion?   

What we DO know, scientifically know, is that to affect the planet's temperature by only one single degree, all CO2 producing things must leave the earth — for 33 years! 33 years for one degree.

No cars. No hospitals, no heating/cooling systems. Hey – no people who exhale CO2.

Does anyone else see the lunacy here?

Oh, BTW, the Climate Clown also wants to force abortions on people and induce economic catastrophes – his version of population control.
 

See Al Gore at the Society of Environmental Journalists’ convention in Madison, Wisconsin. 
See Irish filmmaker Phelim McAleer, director of Not Evil, Just Wrong, a movie critical of the global warming movement confronting Gore.
See Gore sweat (must be that darned global warming).

Because he could not find a real polar bear succumbing to heat stroke in an iceless sea, Al Gore had to use an animated polar bear drowning in his movie.  Finding the real deal is virtually impossible.

Truth is, polar bears are prospering.  Residents of Barrow, Alaska, the state’s northern-most city, are always heavily armed with loaded shotguns when out and about, because of this population explosion.  When in contact with a polar bear they are instructed to shoot to kill at close range.

Whose stupid idea was this anyway?

You do know that you can't just throw these in your regular trash, right? You do know that you have to take them to a Collection Center that deals with mercury, right? You know that they contain toxic mercury? What happens if one breaks?

According to the EPA Mercury/CFL pages:

Never use a vacuum cleaner, broom, or put it down the drain.
Never wash clothing or other items that have come in direct contact with mercury. You must throw it away.
Um, where?

This what they say we should do:
Before cleaning up, air out the room. All people and pets should leave the room. Shut off forced-air heating/AC.
Pick up the shards with cardboard or poster board and place them in a jar and seal it with a metal lid.
Use sticky tape to get the small pieces.
Wipe the area with wet paper towels and place them into the glass jar.

Let's see what to do when a regular incandescent bulb breaks:
Sweep or vacuum up the glass. Go over the surface with a wet paper towel. Throw it all away in your regular trash.

Hmmm, which do you prefer?
Which is safer for people, pets, and the planet?

Yet we are being forced to use this polluting and inferior product.
Why? To make people like Al Gore rich?

In a word, yes.

Since mercury is such a bad pollutant, why are we supposed to use these products?

The government is pushing hard to make us use them. While some big cities may have facilities for dealing with Mercury, how do you enforce people actually taking the time to travel and responsibly dispose of old and broken CFLs?

What about the vast rural areas who only have landfills. They will be polluting the planet and growing areas – thus polluting our food supply.

For example, here is a map of Collection Centers in Iowa.

Who is really going to travel up to 150 miles to throw away CFL lights? Some places will even charge you a fee to take them.

Whose stupid idea was this anyway?

In addition to triggering seizures and migraines, in addition to requiring an entire page of EPA instructions on cleanup should you break one of these mercury-laden wonders, in addition to the lies about how long they last, in addition to the fact that they throw the most putrid of lighting, and in addition to the fact that they will be The Law in 2012 and we can’t recycle them, we now have another advantage to CFL light bulbs.  Fire Hazard.
— Build a home, work on it day and night, stick a Walmart CFL in it and burn it down

And this is what you are left to deal with when you decide to be Al Gore green. We’ve returned a lot of them and we still have these,. So it makes you wonder if you are saving any money at all by purchasing these toxic little pigs.
— Watt the CFL… Walmart’s Trying To Kill Me!

So, whose stupid idea was this anyway??